Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
1 of 13
04/05/2009
Index
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
Preamble: ................................................................................. 3
Classification: ........................................................................... 3
Level of Service and Capacity: .................................................. 4
Typical Road Cross-sections: .................................................... 4
Intersections: ........................................................................... 6
Warrants for Interchanges: ...................................................... 6
Super Routes: ........................................................................... 8
Road Reserves and Land Acquisition:........................................ 8
Road Safety Audits: .................................................................. 9
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
2 of 13
04/05/2009
Preamble:
A substantial portion (over 90%) of the National Road Network (SANRAL
managed) consists of single carriageway (2, 3 or 4 lane) roads. It is likely
that over 50% of these roads will have design standards less than the
desired 120km/h, being roads that were previously considered of a lower
order and/or were designed and constructed before the 1970s.
Substantial lengths of these roads could still satisfy the minimum
standards for a 120km/h design speed, while significant portions may not.
Upgrading all such portions to 120km/h or even a 100km/h design speed
is often found to be impracticable and likely to be unaffordable and not
economically justifiable. In addition most of the lower order of the national
network carry substantially less traffic than the higher order N routes and
is likely to do so for the foreseeable future.
Designers are reminded that design speed is a theoretical design
parameter and must not be confused with actual operating conditions or
even worse, posted speed limit restrictions. Hence, designers must
develop appropriate design solutions for such lower order roads which may
include widening of paved width or cut faces where sight distance is not
optimal, introduction of transition curves and increased super elevation,
warning signs and optical devices where current operating conditions fall
below the generally perceived desirable safe operating conditions etc..
Designers are encouraged to use sound engineering judgement while
ensuring that acceptable operating conditions can be maintained and
future upgrading of such facilities can be accomplished in a rational and
cost effective manner. Designers and project managers are required to
ensure that the distinction between the design speed parameter and
operating speeds and posted speed limits are adequately explained and
addressed in all documentation.
Designers are well advised to consider alignments that will be pleasant to
the motorist to drive on. The motoring experience must be enhanced. For
this reason this consideration and its application must be discussed in
design reports.
Classification:
It is a requirement that SANRALs roads shall be classified in accordance
with the DoTs new RIFSA classification available from DoT or DoT website.
The majority of SANRALs network will fall into Class 1. It is intended that
such roads shall be upgraded and constructed to the minimum preferred
National road standards as far as practicable. The remainder of the
network will fall into Class 2. It is intended that reduced standards could
be tolerated on such roads depending on traffic volumes, now and in the
future. However, SANRAL will also as part of its community development
programme construct Class 6 and 7 roads from time to time. Typical
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
3 of 13
04/05/2009
design details for such roads are included in the SANRALs typical
drawings.
4.2
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
4 of 13
04/05/2009
4.3
Leads to platooning.
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
5 of 13
04/05/2009
Intersections:
o
o
at-grade
intersections
with
new
Typical layouts are provided in the SANRALs typical drawing and the
Geometric Design Guideline.
Aesthetics of Bridges
a. Bridges generally have a life span of anything between 50 and a
100 years and are there for future generations to appreciate or
dislike. It is for this reason it is expected that when roads are
planned that the aesthetics of bridges receive sufficient
attention. Bridge designs that are purely utilitarian and lack
visual appeal must be avoided. It is a fallacy to take for granted
that such structures are significantly cheaper than aesthetically
appealing designs. Attention to aesthetic and practicable detail
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
6 of 13
04/05/2009
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
6.2
Horizontal
structure:
and
vertical
clearances
between
road
and
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
7 of 13
04/05/2009
6.3
6.4
Bridge designs with jack spans and spill through abutments are
preferred and are mandatory at all new interchanges where jack
spans should long enough (generally a clear span of 13m or more)
to accommodate on or off ramps to allow for possible free flow loops
or ramps to be introduced in the future..
6.5
6.6
Super Routes:
In essence, super loads can be defined as follows:
> 125 ton GCM or > 35m long or > 6m wide or > 6m high.
Designers shall investigate and report on the likelihood that a particular route
could be used as a super route. Additional clearances and design loads may
then become applicable
In terms of the TRH11 (Draft Guidelines for granting of exemption permits for
the conveyance of Abnormal Loads) accurate calculation of the stresses
imposed by an abnormal load is in general required where the gross mass of
the vehicle and load exceed 125 000 kg or 18 kN/m (i.e. for superloads).
The Code of Practice for the design of highway bridges and culverts in South
Africa (TMH 7) require that an abnormal design load of 30 kN/m (NC type
loading) be applied in the design of all new bridges and culverts along
abnormal load routes.
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
8 of 13
04/05/2009
The road reserve width for any other national road shall be a minimum of 80
metres and shall be centred on a road reserve centreline that shall also form
the centreline of a dual carriageway highway of which the single carriageway
under consideration shall form one of the future dual carriageways.
It is important to note that a road safety audit which is done during the design stage of a
road is not confused with a road safety investigation which is done on an existing road to
identify remedial measures to improve road safety at a hazardous or high risk location
ROAD SAFETY AUDIT
Conceptual Design
Conceptual design Audit
Preliminary Design
Preliminary design
Audit
Detail Design
Detail design Audit
Construction
Open to Traffic
Construction Audit
(before opening to
traffic)
Diagram 1: Road safety audits during the road design stages (Hirsawa, Asano & SAITO, Proceedings of the
Eastern Asia Society for Transportation Studies, Vol. 5, pp. 2018 - 2031, 2005)
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
9 of 13
04/05/2009
FIGURE 2.1
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
10 of 13
04/05/2009
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
11 of 13
04/05/2009
Terrain
Classification
LOS
TABLE 1: LIMITING VOLUMES FOR TWO LANE SINGLE CARRIAGEWAY HIGHWAY LINKS OR SEGMENTS WITHOUT CLIMBING LANES; 12,4m
WIDTH
AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC (AADT) VEHICLES PER DAY
Peak
Factor
15,00%
Split
39%
26%
28%
61%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
22%
24%
2,930
2,830
2,740
2,650
2,570
2,500
2,430
2,360
2,290
2,230
2,180
2,120
7,030
6,790
6,570
6,370
6,170
5,990
5,820
5,660
5,510
5,360
5,220
5,090
9,370
9,060
8,760
8,490
8,230
7,990
7,760
7,550
7,340
7,150
6,970
6,790
6,960
Flat
8%
30%
9,600
9,280
8,980
8,700
8,440
8,190
7,960
7,740
7,530
7,330
7,140
1,760
1,700
1,640
1,590
1,540
1,500
1,460
1,420
1,370
1,340
1,310
1,270
4,220
4,070
3,940
3,820
3,700
3,590
3,490
3,400
3,310
3,220
3,130
3,050
5,620
5,440
5,260
5,090
4,940
4,790
4,660
4,530
4,400
4,290
4,180
4,070
5,760
5,570
5,390
5,220
5,060
4,910
4,780
4,640
4,520
4,400
4,280
4,180
1,170
1,130
1,100
1,060
1,030
1,000
970
940
920
890
870
850
2,810
2,720
2,630
2,550
2,470
2,400
2,330
2,260
2,200
2,140
2,090
2,040
B
C
D
Mountainous
Rolling
3,750
3,620
3,500
3,400
3,290
3,200
3,100
3,020
2,940
2,860
2,790
2,720
3,840
3,710
3,590
3,480
3,380
3,280
3,180
3,100
3,010
2,930
2,860
2,780
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
12 of 13
04/05/2009
Terrain
Classification
LOS
TABLE 2: LIMITING VOLUMES FOR TWO LANE SINGLE CARRIAGEWAY HIGHWAY LINKS OR SEGMENTS WITHOUT CLIMBING LANES OVER
50% OR MORE OF SEGMENT LENGTH; 13,8m WIDTH or WIDER
AVERAGE ANNUAL DAILY TRAFFIC (AADT) VEHICLES PER DAY
Peak
Factor
15,00%
Split
39%
26%
28%
61%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
22%
24%
3,280
3,170
3,070
2,970
2,880
2,800
2,720
2,640
2,570
2,500
2,440
2,380
7,870
7,610
7,360
7,130
6,920
6,710
6,520
6,340
6,170
6,010
5,850
5,710
10,490
10,140
9,820
9,510
9,220
8,950
8,690
8,450
8,220
8,010
7,800
7,610
10,760
10,400
10,060
9,750
9,450
9,170
8,910
8,660
8,430
8,210
8,000
7,800
1,970
1,900
1,840
1,780
1,730
1,680
1,630
1,580
1,540
1,500
1,460
1,430
4,720
4,570
4,420
4,280
4,150
4,030
3,910
3,800
3,700
3,610
3,510
3,430
30%
6,290
6,080
5,890
5,710
5,530
5,370
5,210
5,070
4,930
4,810
4,680
4,570
6,460
6,240
6,040
5,850
5,670
5,500
5,350
5,200
5,060
4,930
4,800
4,680
1,310
1,270
1,230
1,190
1,150
1,120
1,090
1,060
1,030
1,000
980
950
3,150
3,040
2,940
2,850
2,770
2,680
2,610
2,540
2,470
2,400
2,340
2,280
B
C
D
Mountainous
Rolling
Flat
8%
4,200
4,060
3,930
3,800
3,690
3,580
3,480
3,380
3,290
3,200
3,120
3,040
4,300
4,160
4,020
3,900
3,780
3,670
3,560
3,460
3,370
3,280
3,200
3,120
::ODMA\PCDOCS\DOCS_NRA\384363\10 - DRAFT
13 of 13
04/05/2009